The Marathi poem, Gandhi Mala Bhetala (Gandhi met me), is a satirical critique of those who falsely claim to follow the path of Mahatma Gandhi

The poem was first published in 1983. The poet was a class-III employee of the Bombay Dockyard, Vasant Dattatraya Gujar, now in his 70s. More than two decades later, Tuljapulkar’s case has wound its way to the Supreme Court a unique question the apex court has posed: Under Indian laws, does one have the ‘poetic licence’ to use the name of historical personalities such as Mahatma Gandhi as a symbol in his/her poem, which a reader might find obscene?

The poem has been published several times, before and after Tuljapulkar printed it. It has been appreciated by several Marathi, as well as Hindi poets and authors. It is to be included in an anthology to be published by the Sahitya Academy, put together by the 2014 Gyanpeeth award winner, Bhalchandra Nemade, as one of the best literary works on Gandhi.However, when Tuljapulkar republished the poem in 1994, Patit Pawan Sangathana, a Pune-based right-wing Hindu organisation affiliated to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, filed an FIR against the four, claiming it was obscene and lowered the image of the Father of the Nation.

Tuljapulkar was a leader of the Communist Party of India-controlled All India Bank Employees Association.

In Latur district, the police filed a case against the four, under sections 153A, 153B and 292(3) of the Indian Penal Code. Section 153A is imposed against those promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language. Section 153B is imposed for imputations and assertions prejudicial to national-integration. Section 292(3) is imposed when something is found obscene or lascivious, appeals to the prurient interest or tends to deprave and corrupt someone.

The SC says historically respectable figures command a different threshold of obscenity. Then, without explaining what that threshold is, it says that the question is whether “in the name of artistic freedom… a poet… may be obscene.” Yet there is absolutely no quarrel with that proposition! Everyone accepts that obscenity is a constitutional restriction upon the freedom of speech in India. The question is what constitutes obscenity.

Confusion is worse confounded in its concluding paragraph, where the Court says:

“When the name of Mahatma Gandhi is alluded or used as a symbol, speaking or using obscene words, the concept of “degree” comes in. To elaborate, the “contemporary community standards test” becomes applicable with more vigour, in a greater degree and in an accentuated manner. What can otherwise pass of the contemporary community standards test for use of the same language, it would not be so, if the name of Mahatma Gandhi is used as a symbol or allusion or surrealistic voice to put words or to show him doing such acts which are obscene.”

Case against poet Vasant Dattatreya Gurjar will be heard in lower cour